From: Howard Brazee on 12 Sep 2009 17:00
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:40:53 -0400, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com>
>Academic performance is not always a good measure of intelligence.
>There are lots of very bright people who fail miserably in school.
>Conversely, if you have a really good memory, you can do well in
>school despite the fact that you can't put two facts together to come
>up with an original idea if your life depended on it.
What do you mean by "intelligence"? IQ? Or the ability to use one's
brain to succeed?
>If there's one thing that the military does well, it's personnel
>assessment. Having an influential father will open a lot of doors,
>but the Navy's not going to let someone fly a jet fighter if he can't
>handle the coursework necessary no matter who his dad is. McCain is
>clearly smart enough to fly jets.
It doesn't take a lot of brains to fly jets. (I was a USAF pilot) But
most jet pilots don't get repeated chances to fly again after so many
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
From: BAR on 12 Sep 2009 17:39
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 08:52:53 -0400, BAR wrote:
>> McCain barely managed to graduate from the Naval Academy. McCain's
>> class standing was 895 out of 899. And he still managed to get jets.
>> It helps when your daddy is a 4 star admiral.
> Or a senator.
As a senator you still have to get the votes.
From: Carbon on 12 Sep 2009 18:01
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 15:00:25 -0600, Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 14:40:53 -0400, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com>
>>If there's one thing that the military does well, it's personnel
>>assessment. Having an influential father will open a lot of doors,
>>but the Navy's not going to let someone fly a jet fighter if he can't
>>handle the coursework necessary no matter who his dad is. McCain is
>>clearly smart enough to fly jets.
> It doesn't take a lot of brains to fly jets. (I was a USAF pilot) But
> most jet pilots don't get repeated chances to fly again after so many
McCain had a terrible record from what I've read and lost several
planes. However, nepotism seems to be alive and well in the US armed
services so it never mattered.
From: Jack Hollis on 12 Sep 2009 19:40
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 13:32:38 -0500, Lloyd Parsons
>I don't think that being very smart is all that necessary for a
>President, although it shouldn't hurt. More practical knowledge and
>good leadership skills would be more important I would think.
Management theory says that good executives are able to find good
people, delegate power to subordinates and allow them to do their jobs
without micro-managing everything. Easier said than done.
From: Jim Lovejoy on 13 Sep 2009 14:55
Dinosaur_Sr <frostback2002(a)att.net> wrote in
> On Sep 9, 5:24�pm, "gray asphalt" <dontwr...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>> > On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 16:52:09 -0700, dene wrote:
>> >> "Carbon" <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>> >>> On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 22:08:43 +0000, assimilate wrote:
>> >>> > On �4-Sep-2009, "gray asphalt" <dontwr...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >> Will you explain what the difference is between "rationing"
>> >>> >> and the way things are done now? -
>> >>> > Now coverage is a matter of contract: what the policy says it
>> >>> > will cover and if one party does not live up to the terms then
>> >>> > in can be brought before the authorities to settle. Rationing
>> >>> > socialist style is where one party is the state and who is
>> >>> > going to arbitrate a dispute between you and the state? Why the
>> >>> > state. Wonder how that's going to work out?
>> >>> "Rationing socialist style." I like that. Nice aroma.
>> >>> In your opinion, is more healthcare rationing done in Canada or
>> >>> the US? �I'm always interested in the intersection between
>> >>> reality and ideology, so I'm genuinely curious if you'll be able
>> >>> to bring yourself to concede the obvious.
>> >> Rationing is done more in Canada. �What Bill describes as the
>> >> contra
>> >> system is dead one straight....and it correlates to my 20 years in
>> >> the biz. Furthermore, there is accountability if the contract is
>> >> broken. Conversely, there is accountability if the contract/policy
>> >> was obtained on a fraudulent basis.
>> > Everyone in Canada has healthcare. Millions in the US do not. Just
>> > on that blindingly obvious fact alone, there is way more rationing
>> > in the States.
>> Let's agree on one thing, The US Has the Best Health
>> Care System in the World - for the rich. I'm not saying
>> the superrich can go out and buy a kidney or liver in
>> a thrid world country and have it installed on the down
>> low but there sure are a lot of MRIs for some, while
>> others can't get vaccinations. I don't mean to demean
>> the hard working investment bankers.
>> If you don't believe that there aren't vaccinations for
>> the poor, then would you agree that that should be a
>> part of universal care?
> You don't have to be rich to access the US health care system,
> especially when you are sick. In may caes, a poor person suffering a
> heart attack with be taken to the same hospital and treated by the
> same physicians as a rich person.
> For about $12K per year you can get pretty good health care in the US,
> and it's not that hard to earn $12K in the US...
So your point is that if you don't need to eat or have a place to stay,
it's pretty easy to afford health care?
I agree, but it seems pretty unrealistic to me.
I'd think that even for people who are making good money, paying $12K a
year can be a real hardship.
> of course I'm talking
> about *EARNING* the benefits you use for yourself...because in the end
> someone has to generate the wealth. You can print up all the money you
> want, like say Zimbabwe, but you have to have the wealth to back it
> In the US, of course, you have the freedom, and the responsibility
> associated with being responsible for your own life. You give up one,
> say responsibility, you lose the other.